Naveen Uikey vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

J. P. Gupta, J

Heard.

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant-accused under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail, who is in custody since 14.8.2019 in connection with Crime No.326/2019, registered at Police Station Ganj Betul, District Betul for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) (N), 376(II)(J), 376(III) of the IPC and sections 5, 6 of the POCSO Act.

The allegations against the applicant are that he kidnapped the prosecutrix and committed rape repeatedly with her, who was near about 14 years old at the time of incident.

It is submitted that the applicant is innocent. He is in custody since 14.8.2020. Trial is still pending and it will take time. In this case, the prosecutrix in her statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has not stated that the applicant committed offence of kidnapping or committing rape with her. Later on, in her vaginal swab, semen was found and in her further statement recorded by the police, she stated that she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the applicant. But, till today no DNA report has been filed to establish the fact that semen belong to the applicant. There is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is a youth of 18 years old and. His further custody is not warranted. No purpose would be served by keeping him in the custody. Hence, he be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the bail application and prayed for rejection of the same.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and further custody of the applicant is not required, this application is allowed and it I the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-section (3) of Section 437 of Cr.P.C.

C.C. as per rules.